Avon planners hear traffic, safety and flooding concerns over 180‑unit Nod Road housing proposal

The Avon Planning and Zoning Commission on Tuesday continued its review and closed the public hearing on three related applications seeking to convert a portion of 100 Nod Road into a Nod Road Housing Opportunity Zone and to build 180 multifamily units under CGS 8‑30g.

Chair Lisa Levin said commissioners had received supplemental materials and peer reviews and pressed consultants on whether the submitted traffic analyses addressed safety in addition to congestion measures. "LOS measures convenience and delay but does not measure safety," Levin said, citing federal materials she had reviewed and asking if a LOSS (level‑of‑service safety) analysis could be provided to the State review authority.

Applicant traffic consultants said the traffic study used industry standards (ITE Parking Generation and Trip Generation manuals), recent counts and peer review by BL Companies. Michael Shepley and traffic engineer Scott Hesketh testified that, based on their analyses, the project would not create adverse public‑health or safety impacts on the roadway network and that capacity at the Route 44/Nod Road intersection would remain about LOS D with estimated increases in delay of only a few seconds. Hesketh said modest signal retiming by the State Department of Transportation/OSTA could mitigate effects.

Commissioners and residents pushed back. Joseph Gentile said he was concerned about parking spaces that would require backing onto Nod Road and asked for mitigation before any approval. Several residents said the proposal was too dense for the site and cited recurring flooding on Nod Road, morning traffic backups at Route 44 and pedestrian safety for schoolchildren. Dr. John Crouch told the commission that noise and increased traffic "impact mental health, sleep, and cognition, especially for children and older people." Several speakers submitted written photos and comments documenting local traffic conditions.

Consultants and the applicant responded that site elevations and drainage measures were designed to avoid on‑site flood risk: engineer David Ziaks reported the building's first‑floor elevation at 179.5 feet, above the FEMA 100‑ and 500‑year elevations cited in the record (162.5 and 166, respectively), and said on‑site stormwater systems combined with properly maintained town culverts would prevent ponding. Ziaks noted three town‑owned culverts under Nod Road and said maintenance is the town Department of Public Works' responsibility; the applicant offered to own and maintain drainage pipes located on the property.

On pedestrian safety and school buses, consultants said bus pickup locations and related safety measures are determined in consultation with the Board of Education and the bus operator; the applicant said it would provide a concrete pad or bus shelter if required. Consultants cautioned that sidewalks that "go nowhere" can create hazard points where pedestrians are placed into traffic flow, but said a limited pad or sidewalk could be installed if the Town or BOE requested it.

The applicant outlined on‑site provisions for deliveries, with two designated loading areas and parking lot radii sized for package and food delivery vehicles. The architect and fire‑safety consultants said the buildings will be fully sprinklered and meet applicable state building and fire codes; the Fire Marshal had submitted comments but the applicant said those comments pre‑dated its June 8 supplemental response.

The record shows a mix of expert opinions and public concern. Applicant counsel Tim Hollister argued that the hearing record contained independent expert reviews and "no evidence of a substantial public health or safety concern" to justify denial under CGS 8‑30g. Residents and several commissioners asked for clearer assurances about parking safety, school bus pickups and culvert maintenance.

The public hearing was closed by unanimous motion; the record will be used by the PZC in its deliberations. The commission did not vote on the applications at the June 16 meeting; next steps will be PZC deliberation and any future vote or conditions the commission chooses to attach.